Tradition

  • Thread starter Thread starter sarahcatherineh
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Please. The Father , Son, Holy Spirit is all over the bible.

I am not saying there is not purgatory, simply stating its strictly tradition and not biblical. I think many fellow Catholics would agree.
Sure, Father, Son and HS are all over the Bible. But where does it say that they are the same God? That there is One God and that He is 3 persons?

Have you ever had any discussions with Jehovah’s Witnesses about the Trinity being “all over the bible”?
 
Sure, Father, Son and HS are all over the Bible. But where does it say that they are the same God? That there is One God and that He is 3 persons?

Have you ever had any discussions with Jehovah’s Witnesses about the Trinity being “all over the bible”?
I am sure our opinions of Jehovah Witness is compatible. But the context here is the biblical support of purgatory. There is none, that is OK being its tradition.
 
Please. The Father , Son, Holy Spirit is all over the bible.

I am not saying there is not purgatory, simply stating its strictly tradition and not biblical. I think many fellow Catholics would agree.
But the context here is the biblical support of purgatory. There is none, that is OK being its tradition.
I think that the problem here is your use of the term “strictly tradition and not biblical” - the Doctrine of Purgatory, as demonstrated, is not strictly Tradition. There are many biblical references.
Now one might say that the doctrine of purgatory is the codification of a traditional belief and the the referenced biblical passages allude to this. But that is different than saying it is strictly tradition.

Do see what I mean?

Peace
James
 
I think that the problem here is your use of the term “strictly tradition and not biblical” - the Doctrine of Purgatory, as demonstrated, is not strictly Tradition. There are many biblical references.
Now one might say that the doctrine of purgatory is the codification of a traditional belief and the the referenced biblical passages allude to this. But that is different than saying it is strictly tradition.

Do see what I mean?

Peace
James
Thanks for a civil debate. We agree to disagree. I am moving on to another issue.
 
Thanks for a civil debate. We agree to disagree. I am moving on to another issue.
Sorry but I do not agree to disagree…:D…I much prefer seeking consensus on a topic.

I do appreciate the civil discussion though.

Peace
James
 
Please. The Father , Son, Holy Spirit is all over the bible.

I am not saying there is not purgatory, simply stating its strictly tradition and not biblical. I think many fellow Catholics would agree.
I am Catholic! I do not agree with you!

Purgatory is scriptual you’re just rejecting it.
 
Hi,

I was hoping to gain a clearer understanding of what constitutes Sacred Tradition. Would you be able to give me a good definition and some good example?

The other part that is not clear to me is that since it was passed on orally how do we know what it is? Is it anything the Church teaches? And how do I distinguish tradition from the teaching Magisterium.

This area is very foggy to me. I accept the Church and all it teaches, but I can not explain to others that which is unclear to me.

Thank you.
This article should give you insights and a better understanding of Sacred Tradition:mark-shea.com/tradition.html

Sacred Tradition is the living and growing truth of Christ contained, not only in Scripture, but in the common teaching, common life, and common worship of the Church.

Nope. It simply acted as a lens and refocused the light of Scripture so that something which had been hidden there was now visible. For, despite appearances, the dogmatic definitions of the Church do not just pop up with absolutely no relation to Scripture. Rather, they assemble the materially sufficient revelation of Scripture using the mortar of Sacred Tradition. And that Tradition is not separate, secret and parallel to Scripture, but the common teaching, life, and worship of the Church.

This pattern of seeing Scripture in light of Sacred Tradition is absolutely crucial to understand, because failure to grasp it accounts for an enormous amount of misunderstanding. Evangelicals who have received (usually without realizing it) a pair of contact lenses colored by the Tradition of the Closure of Public Revelation can “see” that Tradition implied in Paul’s commands to Timothy. Yet we do not derive the doctrine from Scripture. Rather, we see it reflected there. But since Evangelicals have not received the contact lenses with the Tradition of the Perpetual Virginity of Mary, they are unable to see it reflect there. Instead, they imagine that doctrine is arrived at by Catholics sitting down with a Bible and saying, “Let’s see. What is the most tortured and extreme reading I can get out of Matthew 1:25 today? Hey! Let’s say Mary remained a virgin perpetually!”
 
Hi,

I was hoping to gain a clearer understanding of what constitutes Sacred Tradition. Would you be able to give me a good definition and some good example?
Tradition is not “just” orally. It is more, “unwritten,” and continues living in the Church. It can be interpretations, And I wonder if Staples meant all Tradition is traceable to the single first-century deposit of faith, not that all dogmas were articulated by the Apostles in the 1st century. After all, Catholics teach that doctrine can develop. Protestants do too, such as how they accept the canon of Scripture, although they do not admit, or perhaps realize this.

Take an early example from the Early Church Father Origen on infant baptism:*The Church received from the apostles the tradition of giving baptism even to infants. The apostles, to whom were committed the secrets of the divine sacraments, knew there are in everyone innate strains of [original] sin, which must be washed away through water and the Spirit" (Commentaries on Romans 5:9 [A.D. 248]). *So sometimes, there is an ECF telling us that this has been a Tradition passed down.

Also, consider these definitions from the Church Herself on Tradition, perhaps these will help clarify. Catholic definitions of sacred Tradition:… in the Catholic Church itself, all possible care must be taken, that we hold that faith which has been believed everywhere, always, by all. For that is truly and in the strictest sense “Catholic,” which, as the name itself and the reason of the thing declare, comprehends all universally. This rule we shall observe if we follow universality, antiquity, consent. We shall follow universality if we confess that one faith to be true, which the whole Church throughout the world confesses [note: as opposed to that which is merely regional]; antiquity, if we in no wise depart from those interpretations which it is manifest were notoriously held by our holy ancestors and fathers [note: as opposed to something novel]; consent, in like manner, if in antiquity itself we adhere to the consentient definitions and determinations of all, or at the least of almost all priests and doctors. [St. Vincent of Lerins, http://www.newadvent.org/fathers/3506.htm”]Commonitorium, ch. 2.6, 434 A.D]Therefore Christ the Lord in whom the full revelation of the supreme God is brought to completion (see Cor 1:20; 3:13; 4:6), commissioned the apostles to preach to all men that Gospel which is the source of all saving truth and moral teaching, and to impart to them heavenly gifts. This Gospel had been promised in former times through the prophets, and Christ Himself had fulfilled it and promulgated it with His lips. This commission was faithfully fulfilled by the apostles who, by their oral preaching, by example, and by observances handed on what they had received from the lips of Christ, from living with Him, and from what He did, or what they had learned through the prompting of the Holy Spirit.(Dei Verbum #7)It also clearly perceives that these truths and rules are contained in the written books and in the unwritten traditions, which, received by the Apostles from the mouth of Christ Himself, or from the Apostles themselves, the Holy Ghost dictating, have come down to us, transmitted as it were from hand to hand. (Council of Trent, Session IV, April 8, 1546)

Catechism #81 “And [Holy] Tradition transmits in its entirety the Word of God which has been entrusted to the apostles by Christ the Lord and the Holy Spirit. It transmits it to the successors of the apostles so that, enlightened by the Spirit of truth, they may faithfully preserve, expound and spread it abroad by their preaching.”

Catechism #83 The Tradition here in question comes from the apostles and hands on what they received from Jesus’ teaching and example and what they learned from the Holy Spirit. The first generation of Christians did not yet have a written New Testament, and the New Testament itself demonstrates the process of living Tradition.

A former classmate of Pope Pius XII, Monsignor George Agius wrote of Tradition in his book Tradition and the Church:*Some of them had been originally written; others came to us orally, from father to son; or in a practical way, as through the ceremonies of the Church for instance. For this reason, Traditions are either written, oral or practical. Some Traditions are called Written Traditions because the word Tradition may be taken in its widest signification, to include whatever has been delivered to us. In this sense, even the Scriptures may be called Traditions.*So if we can understand that even theological principles can be delivered to us, methods of interpretation, or ideas like interpreting Mary as the new Eve (which is a most ancient understanding), we can see how Tradition continues to unfold under the guidances of the Holy Spirit - even though there remains a single deposit of faith from which the truths flow. I think this line of theological thinking is represented in Paul’s teaching to his appointed bishop Timothy:*Follow the pattern of sound words which you have heard from me, in the faith and love which are in Christ Jesus; guard the truth that has been entrusted to you by the Holy Spirit who dwells within us.” (2 Tim 1:13-14)*I think this passage may suggest that Paul is setting forth a “pattern”––not just a static shopping list of data. God’s word is quite living. :o
 
For a concept supposedly as important as purgatory, one would at least find the actual term mentioned in scripture. Heaven and hell are mentioned numerous times in scripture, but not a single mention of the term ‘purgatory’ !
 
I also listened to a Tim Staples cd that said all Tradition came from only the first century.

What is not clear to me is what makes it confined to the first century? Is Tradition anything that the first apostles taught? This is confusing to me, becasue Paul was not one of the original twelve.

The other part that is not clear to me is that since it was passed on orally how do we know what it is? Is it anything the Church teaches? And how do I distinguish tradition from the teaching Magisterium.
I think the Church has too loosely run with making changes / innovations … in recent centuries. I wish it had stuck to what the ECF’s believed …what was orally taught before the New Testament Gospels were written, with SCRIPTURE becoming the BEDROCK for faith/morals of Christian belief in the post-apostolic / second century.

Take the process of one’s becoming a SAINT in the Catholic Church. It is totally different now, from what happened in the early days. Has God changed his rules on who is considered a SAINT ? The Church certainly has a :newidea:.

3000 saints in total … and now 300 more, just in last 3 decades :confused::confused:

I also don’t think the new Liturgy changes are an improvement. The old language was much better.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top